《臺美21世紀貿易倡議首批協定執行法案》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade First Agreement Implementation Act)已分別於6月21日在美國眾議院,以及7月18日在美國參議院,透過口頭表決,獲得一致同意無異議通過。
7月19日外交部就貼出下面這個圖片,但這並不代表《臺美21世紀貿易倡議》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade)就已經生效執行。
而目前該法案已經完成眾議院議長麥卡錫(Kevin McCarthy)簽署程序,並於7月27日正式送交拜登總統簽署。但是這項協議是否就會隨即生效呢?其實不然,真正原因已經在該法案各條款中明確律定與說明
SEC. 5. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT.
Congress approves the Agreement between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States regarding Trade between the United States of America and Taiwan, done on June 1, 2023.
但若您問這是否意味著在拜登總統簽署《臺美21世紀貿易倡議首批協定執行法案》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade First Agreement Implementation Act)之後,《臺美21世紀貿易倡議》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade)首批協議就會馬上生效,依據該法案第六條第(a)款所強調生效之前提條件,這個答案是否定的。
SEC. 6. ENTRY INTO FORCE OF AGREEMENT.
(a) Conditions For Entry Into Force Of Agreement.—The President may provide for the Agreement to enter into force not earlier than 30 days after the date on which the President submits to Congress a certification under subsection (c).
換言之,就是要在美國總統依據該法案,向國會提交第六條第(c)款所要求之證明(certification)後,至少再等30天,才能夠正式生效執行。
而這個要求美國總統向國會提交之證明(certification),其中內容包括什麼呢?依據該法案第六條第(c)款;
(c) Certification.—A certification under this subsection is a certification in writing that—
(1) indicates the President has determined Taiwan has taken measures necessary to comply with the provisions of the Agreement that are to take effect not later than the date on which the Agreement enters into force; and
(2) identifies the anticipated date the President intends to exchange notes or take any other action to notify Taiwan that the United States has completed all procedures necessary to bring the Agreement into force.
所以很顯然臺北與華盛頓,後續都要依據2023年6月1日所簽協議內容,採取實際行動,並且相互知會與確認後,《臺美21世紀貿易倡議》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade)首批協議,才會真正生效執行。換句話說,這協議是個不見兔子不撒鷹約定,雙方都要繼續努力,才能夠讓其真正實現付諸實行。
SEC. 8. RELATIONSHIP OF THE AGREEMENT TO UNITED STATES AND STATE LAW.
(a) Relationship Of The Agreement To United States Law.—
⋯⋯⋯⋯
(2) INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.—The Agreement does not constitute a free trade agreement for purposes of section 30D(e)(1)(A)(i)(II) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
但是經過此項國會審議程序,其實是明顯增加該協議之政治性,同時亦對兩岸來說,存在難以遭人察覺之風險。為何要在此強調此點,此因從美國與中華民國在1979年2月1日正式斷交後,臺北不是沒有與華盛頓簽署過協定,但卻從未被美國國務院列入過有關條約與協定之正式記錄內。
美國國務院層經刊行過《Treaties in Force — A List of Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States in Force on January 1, 2020》
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/TIF-2020-Full-website-view.pdf
而中華民國在斷交後,美國依據《臺灣關係法》繼續視其有效之雙邊條約,詳列於第497頁至498頁。請注意所有在與美國斷交後所簽署之外交協議與協定,完全沒有被收錄在這份清單內。
美國國務院後續又刊行過《Treaties in Force — Supplemental List of Treaties and Other International Agreements》涵蓋自2020年1月1日至2023年1月1日期間內,美國所簽署與加入,對美國有效之雙邊與多邊條約與協定;其中亦無任何資料涉及臺灣。
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/TIF-Supplement-Report-2023.pdf
可是以往臺北經文代表處與美國在臺協會所簽協議與協定,是否從未送往國會,經由國會參眾兩院審議批准呢?或許各方應當從此切入,理解到以如此程序處理《臺美21世紀貿易倡議》(US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade)首批協議,勢必將產生高度政治性。